Welcome to De-Commissioned, a place for former members of the Great Commission movement (aka GCM, GCC, GCAC, GCI, the Blitz) to discuss problems they've experienced in the association's practices and theology.

You may read and post, but some features are restricted to registered members. Please consider registering to gain full access! Registration is free and only takes a few moments to complete.
De-Commissioned Forum
March 28, 2024, 06:12:47 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Sovereign Grace Survivors  (Read 35654 times)
Genevieve
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126



« Reply #20 on: December 23, 2009, 02:10:55 pm »

Thanks. I'm glad you found it helpful.

I should amend my earlier post a little.

I said I was against "the amount of authority leaders have at a young age." I should clarify that I'm against the amount of authority that leaders have, especially at a young age.

In a related item, I'm against the teaching that says you should always obey your leader (as long as it's not sin). This teaching says that you can pray about it, try to dissuade the leader that emptying your retirement fund is a bad idea, but, if he insists, you should still do it.

Finally (I think!), I'm against the hush-hush culture where talking about unhealthy practices or teachings in the church is slander. That culture makes honest discussion, growth, and mutual understanding more difficult, if not impossible at times.
Logged
still confused
Guest

« Reply #21 on: December 23, 2009, 02:34:33 pm »

In a related item, I'm against the teaching that says you should always obey your leader (as long as it's not sin). This teaching says that you can pray about it, try to dissuade the leader that emptying your retirement fund is a bad idea, but, if he insists, you should still do it.

Finally (I think!), I'm against the hush-hush culture where talking about unhealthy practices or teachings in the church is slander. That culture makes honest discussion, growth, and mutual understanding more difficult, if not impossible at times.

1. I'm also against that teaching. God is everyone's ultimate authority - spouses, parents and pastors have their roles, but you don't HAVE to do what they say. If they insist - ask them, "who do you think you are?" God Himself?
2. I'm also against this and have attempted to get people to talk about their issues. It's not slander/sinful to question leaders. It's healthy. Like I said before, I took a break and talked with various people before returning to the fellowship.
Logged
Genevieve
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126



« Reply #22 on: December 23, 2009, 03:11:37 pm »

Hooray! One more thing we agree about.

It's one thing to wander into a GC church, get involved, and then later discover some of these things.

It's another to know some of the dangers/problems, walk away for awhile, talk/pray about it, and return.

Wishing you all the best,
G.

Logged
EverAStudent
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 716



WWW
« Reply #23 on: December 25, 2009, 08:21:51 am »

Hi Gen,

Quote from: Gen
It's one thing to wander into a GC church, get involved, and then later discover some of these things.

It's another to know some of the dangers/problems, walk away for awhile, talk/pray about it, and return.

Given the proportionately large number of excellent mainstream and independent churches that still exist here in the States, I am certain that I would not recommend a shepherding movement-GC church to anyone to "try" or to "wander into" without prior education.  In fact, once one knows what is at the heart of their pastoral philosophy I am uncertain why anyone would intentionally commit at all since the shepherding movement philosophy violates 1 Peter 5:3 and thus makes the man unfit for the pastorate--why intentionally put unfit individuals over you?

Merry Christmas, Gen!
 
Logged
Genevieve
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126



« Reply #24 on: December 25, 2009, 06:42:08 pm »

Yeah, I certainly wouldn't want anyone to go back, but at least it's with open eyes.
Logged
BTDT
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 144



« Reply #25 on: December 27, 2009, 07:46:33 pm »

This has been a wonderful thread for me to read.  I have only a couple of pennies to throw in.

still confused, I am very encouraged by your posts here.  You seem to really want to have a dialogue about the issues raised here.  Like you, I've attended a very good GC church within the last several years, and I believe there are a lot more than just our two.  When we left a couple of years ago, our church friends were still our friends; there was no hint of "shunning" or "O how the mighty have fallen".  My mens' group from that church still meets regularly, even though only 2 of the 5 of us still go to the GC church.

As I'm sure you've seen from reading here and maybe elsewhere, in the early decades of the GC movement, pretty much all of the churches had the same serious problems. to one degree or another.  There were a couple of exceptions, documented in Larry Pile's book and some posts here by Sam Lopez, but for the most part, they were all the same.  That's the system that hurt many of us, myself included, so deeply. 

A few of those churches never did change, and are still just as bad today.  Those are the ones to watch out for, in my opinion. 

One final thought -- when I read the new GC website and other materials, I have a hard time interpreting them.  Mostly, I still hear echoes of the past, even in some of the wording, so I don't think I can be impartial.

Best advice I can give to anyone who asks -- read the 1991 apology letter (as we called it back then), and evaluate an individual GC church in its light.

Peace, love and freedom,
BTDT
Logged
Linda
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2520



« Reply #26 on: December 27, 2009, 09:13:49 pm »

Quote from: BTDT
A few of those churches never did change, and are still just as bad today.  Those are the ones to watch out for, in my opinion.
While I'm glad that you are pleased with your local GC church, the dilemma of attending a GC church is that it is not an island. Like it or not, your local church leaders are first and foremost committed to GC and what it stands for. Since GC nationally still teaches and practices many of the things they "apologized" for in the 1991 statement, I find it difficult to believe that certain practices don't filter down to the local level. Certainly, any church member attending a national gathering, such as Faithwalkers or HSLT, will find themselves under teaching that violates the terms of the apology. As recently as last year, during Faithwalkers, the idea of lifetime commitment to the local church and asking parents to not interfere with that commitment was taught.
Logged

Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift.
BTDT
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 144



« Reply #27 on: December 27, 2009, 09:50:45 pm »

Hi, Linda -- my reply is based on my experience at the local GC church here (the "good one", as I call it).
... the dilemma of attending a GC church is that it is not an island. Like it or not, your local church leaders are first and foremost committed to GC and what it stands for. Since GC nationally still teaches and practices many of the things they "apologized" for in the 1991 statement, I find it difficult to believe that certain practices don't filter down to the local level.
I've found no evidence of those practices -- and believe me, I know them when I see them. I've talked openly and honestly with a couple of the local pastors about the 1991 statement, and my past GC experiences, and they were quite open and willing to talk.
Quote
Certainly, any church member attending a national gathering, such as Faithwalkers or HSLT, will find themselves under teaching that violates the terms of the apology. As recently as last year, during Faithwalkers, the idea of lifetime commitment to the local church and asking parents to not interfere with that commitment was taught.
I hadn't heard of Faithwalkers or HSLT until I started reading here.  Maybe I wasn't paying attention when they were advertised, but I don't think they were, or at least not enough to get my attention.  LT was the big thing, 'cause it's first and foremost a college church.

I wonder if that's a difference right there -- college church (GCM) vs. community church (GCAC).
Logged
Linda
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2520



« Reply #28 on: December 27, 2009, 10:21:26 pm »

You may be on to something. There may be a difference between GCM and GCC churches. They have the same "founding apostle" in McCotter, but as I understand it have different boards and for a time GCM churches had a different conference after Christmas, didn't they? Can't remember the name of it.

One point I would make is that I assume most people in our old GC church would say that the church is pretty normal. It took me 8 years to realize things were "off". The doctrinal statement is fine, there is an emphasis on evangelism, etc. I would also say that most of the people attending our old church have no idea of the manner in which the pastors tried to insert themselves between us and our children (including our minor children) in an attempt to exercise their spiritual authority. I will keep saying it, sending private, personal correspondence of rebuke to my husband and me is one thing. Sending that letter to our children (and who knows, maybe a lot of other people) without our knowledge and permission is just plain wrong. The fact that this was done is not known to the people attending our former church (unless they are reading this forum).

Our minor daughter was asked to make a lifetime commitment to our church while in Colorado at an HSLT. There were a few hundred minors attending that conference who were all asked to make that commitment. That talk is still available online, so they must think it's just fine. They still teach that (but now they add the disclaimer that parents determine the church of their minor children.) Funny though, how they left a talk up that contradicts that teaching.

The pattern seems to be: Get caught teaching something that is wrong, "apologize" for it, but continue the behavior, get caught again, mention that they have already apologized long ago and throw in that people are persecuting them and slandering them, continue the behavior, etc.
Logged

Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift.
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
SimplePortal 2.1.1